Abstract

Central to a precise understanding of the stance of the Constitution in a country is to scrutinize the scopes and restrictions of the Constitutional review of the ordinary laws. The Indian Constitution is an interesting adaptation of the British parliamentary sovereignty and American judicial sovereignty. The main question is to clarify the areas of Constitutional review of the ordinary laws of the parliament and its limitations. The review of the Constitutionality of the laws is implemented based on two concepts: First, the fundamental rights regarding the ordinary laws, and second the basic structure regarding the Constitutional amendments. The restrictions imposed on the Indian Constitutional review are composed of two general classes: Constraints due to the exceptional circumstances and restrictions regarding the legal structure of India. Proceedings without legal ceremonies, military rule and declaration of necessity are subject to the first exception, and power of the parliament to amend the Constitution and the posteriori review relate to the second limitation which have an insignificant impact on Constitutional review due to being provisional and exceptional. Therefore, despite the relative sovereignty of the Parliament in India, the vast scope of the provisions subject to Constitutional review has created a great status for the Constitution against the enactments of the parliament and the Supreme Court develops this supremacy through its well-founded decisions.